Question for Seventh Day Adventist members

[prodromos]

Answer what exactly?

My question in post #124.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

My question in post #124.

I did not quote Gibbons here. That is why I said perhaps you may need to read and follow the conversation earlier. We were discussing him not quoting him.

 

[prodromos]

I did not quote Gibbons here. That is why I said perhaps you may need to read and follow the conversation earlier. We were discussing him not quoting him.

I am still trying to understand what the point of raising Gibbon's work was meant to achieve. Is he a source for SDA belief?
Since you had not been quoting him, there was no context or reference point to understand why you brought him up. Your responses thus far have not helped to clarify.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Every view has bias and critics especially if it does not agree with teachings that are viewed as truthful. That does not mean it is right or wrong.

And, yet the propaganda of your sources are in fact wrong. That is the whole point of Woodrow's' book. The well known "trail of blood" errors has been refuted.

Errors in "The Trail of Blood'?
Anabaptist Heresies Exposed: The Trail Of Blood: A book review

 

[LoveGodsWord]

And, yet the propaganda of your sources are in fact wrong. That is the whole point of Woodrow's' book. The well known "trail of blood" errors has been refuted.

Errors in "The Trail of Blood'?
Anabaptist Heresies Exposed: The Trail Of Blood: A book review

Not really. I have never made any quotes to the book you are quoting from and so have no idea what your talking about.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Not really. I have never made any quotes to the book you are quoting from and so have no idea what your talking about.

No, I happen to be an objective historical scholar.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

No, I happen to be an objective historical scholar.

Really? I have never met one. They all say the same thing no matter what version is served up.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Really? I have never met one. They all say the same thing no matter what version is served up.

Yes friend, really. I am enjoying our friendly discussion.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Did I get them all?

Use find Undo Rating, click

 

[AdamjEdgar]

I have come in on this topic very late. Skipped a lot of fluff in the middle and now find myself reading an article about an extremely radical and small group who were within the Anabaptist movement that were not at all representative of mainstream in that movement...how did it get to this point exactly?

consistently Adventist explainations of our churches official views on EG White have been ignored. Instead hearsay and falsehoods taken as truth. What is wrong with you people? You ask for Adventist views then ignore the answers given!

 

[tall73]

I have come in on this topic very late. Skipped a lot of fluff in the middle and now find myself reading an article about an extremely radical and small group who were within the Anabaptist movement that were not at all representative of mainstream in that movement...how did it get to this point exactly?

Skipping things in the middle probably doesn't help understand how they got there.

 

[The Liturgist]

Here is another question for Adventist members, who keep asking us to show them where Sunday worship happens in the New Testament.

I would like an Adventist to show me where it says that Ellen G White can teach and have authority over men. Saint Paul was very clear that the leadership of the Church was to be Patriarchal. That is why we study the early church fathers and call this field Patristics. Furthermore, Saint Paul directed that women were to keep silent in the church. Many liturgical traditions have historically abided by this in the fullest and most literal way possible, through the exclusive use of male choristers and boys’ choirs.

It is clear from a history of the Adventist church that Ellen G White wielded authority over and taught men, and continues to do so through her voluminous writings, and had the loudest voice of anyone in terms of influence and the weight of her opinions during the formation of the modern SDA church, and has an even louder voice now, in the absence of a living successor, an authority and voice Saint Paul the Apostle clearly said she should not have.

And why, for that matter, does she not have successors? Why should a young woman, whose coming was not prophesied in the Bible, appear, acquire and wield enormous authority, authority that St. Paul says she should not have had, an authority to the point where her writings are regarded as infallible, and then pass away, without leaving a successor, and without any of the related events described as happening at the end of time occurring?

It should be noted that no Roman Catholic Pope has all of their writings regarded as infallible, even given the seriously erroneous doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Indeed, since the adoption of that doctrine at the First Vatican Council, it has been used twice, by Pius IX and Pius XII, to promulgate as infallible dogma two already popular theological opinions. In contrast, all of White’s dogmatic statements seem to be regarded as infallible; Adventists claim to be sola scriptura, but when you have only one authoritative guide to scripture, and that guide is regarded as The Spirit of Prophecy whose interpretations are free from error, that is very different from the freedom of interpretation argued for by Martin Luther and the other Reformers.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Here is another question for Adventist members, who keep asking us to show them where Sunday worship happens in the New Testament.

I would like an Adventist to show me where it says that Ellen G White can teach and have authority over men. Saint Paul was very clear that the leadership of the Church was to be Patriarchal. That is why we study the early church fathers and call this field Patristics. Furthermore, Saint Paul directed that women were to keep silent in the church. Many liturgical traditions have historically abided by this in the fullest and most literal way possible, through the exclusive use of male choristers and boys’ choirs.

It is clear from a history of the Adventist church that Ellen G White wielded authority over and taught men, and continues to do so through her voluminous writings, and had the loudest voice of anyone in terms of influence and the weight of her opinions during the formation of the modern SDA church, and has an even louder voice now, in the absence of a living successor, an authority and voice Saint Paul the Apostle clearly said she should not have.

There is a difference between having women leaders in the Church teaching the flock and having women who are prophets in the Church teaching God's Word. This was from an interesting article I read somewhere that might be helpful.

Women Prophets in the Old Testament

The label “prophetess” or “woman prophet” (něbī’āh) is attributed to five women in the Old Testament: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4:4), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22), Noadiah (Neh. 6:14), and “the prophetess” (Isa. 8:3). Its significance is clear. Miriam claims the Lord “has spoken” through her (Num. 12:2). Deborah says to Barak: “Look, the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded” (Judg. 4:6). Huldah similarly uses the prophetic introductory formula: “Thus says the Lord God of Israel…” (2 Kings 22:15). Scripture, then, describes a woman prophet as someone through whom God speaks to his people. In this regard, a “prophetess” is no different than her male counterpart, the “prophet” (nābī’). For this reason, I prefer the translation “woman prophet.”

Women Prophets in the New Testament

Luke presents Anna as a “woman prophet” (prophētis), which is the same Greek word the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses to translate the Hebrew něbī’āh (Luke 2:36). Like the prophet Simeon who is paired with her (2:25–27), Anna is led by the Holy Spirit to speak about Jesus “to all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem” (2:38). The masculine gender of the signifiers describing her intended audience suggests Anna prophesies to both men and women. Elsewhere, Luke uses the feminine signifier to define an audience of women only (15:9).

Luke’s depiction of Anna as a prophet anticipates Pentecost, when Mary the mother of Jesus and other women prophesy (Acts 1:14; 2:17). Luke makes another link between Anna and early Christian women prophets when he introduces Philip’s daughters as “virgins who prophesy” (Acts 21:9)

In Revelation, specifically in the letter to Thyatira (Rev. 2:18–29), Jesus criticizes a woman who calls herself a woman prophet—the same word Luke uses for Anna—for “teaching and deceiving my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (v. 20). The woman is clearly a leader in the church of Thyatira. But is she a genuine prophet? The prophet Jeremiah makes personal holiness and purity a litmus test for genuine prophecy (Jer. 23:9–40). Jesus, similarly, advises his disciples to expose false prophets by drawing attention to their behavior (Matt. 7:15–23). Unfortunately, the character and behavior of the woman from Thyatira did not meet the litmus test of a genuine prophet. Yet what is often missed is that Jesus does not attack the woman for being a leader, but for being an immoral one. (from CBE International).

So to claim that women prophets do not have authority in the Church is not biblical. Women prophets are not women in general.

And why, for that matter, does she not have successors? Why should a young woman, whose coming was not prophesied in the Bible, appear, acquire and wield enormous authority, authority that St. Paul says she should not have had, an authority to the point where her writings are regarded as infallible, and then pass away, without leaving a successor, and without any of the related events described as happening at the end of time occurring?

Why would a prophets coming need to be foretold in the bible? That claim is not biblical. Your claims here in regards of women having authority in the Church does not apply to prophets who are messengers from God (men or women). Of course women who are not prophets do not have authority in the mainstream SDA Church.

It should be noted that no Roman Catholic Pope has all of their writings regarded as infallible, even given the seriously erroneous doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Indeed, since the adoption of that doctrine at the First Vatican Council, it has been used twice, by Pius IX and Pius XII, to promulgate as infallible dogma two already popular theological opinions. In contrast, all of White’s dogmatic statements seem to be regarded as infallible; Adventists claim to be sola scriptura, but when you have only one authoritative guide to scripture, and that guide is regarded as The Spirit of Prophecy whose interpretations are free from error, that is very different from the freedom of interpretation argued for by Martin Luther and the other Reformers.

I notice you qualify your post here about Roman Catholic doctrines of infallibility "ALL the Popes writings". This is not a comparison of fallible men with those who have been given a message from God to give to the people (prophets). You speak of what you do not know. Do you believe God has given spiritual gifts to the church? What we teach is only in support of Sola Scriptura. Where have I or any SDA here at CF ever made a thread based on what EGW says and not scripture? People who ask these questions are normally those who do not want to discuss the scriptures in my experience.

Hope this is helpful.

 

[The Liturgist]

There is a difference between having women leaders in the Church teaching the flock and having women who are prophets in the Church teaching God's Word. This was from an interesting article I read somewhere that might be helpful.

Women Prophets in the Old Testament

The label “prophetess” or “woman prophet” (něbī’āh) is attributed to five women in the Old Testament: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4:4), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chron. 34:22), Noadiah (Neh. 6:14), and “the prophetess” (Isa. 8:3). Its significance is clear. Miriam claims the Lord “has spoken” through her (Num. 12:2). Deborah says to Barak: “Look, the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded” (Judg. 4:6). Huldah similarly uses the prophetic introductory formula: “Thus says the Lord God of Israel…” (2 Kings 22:15). Scripture, then, describes a woman prophet as someone through whom God speaks to his people. In this regard, a “prophetess” is no different than her male counterpart, the “prophet” (nābī’). For this reason, I prefer the translation “woman prophet.”

Women Prophets in the New Testament

Luke presents Anna as a “woman prophet” (prophētis), which is the same Greek word the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses to translate the Hebrew něbī’āh (Luke 2:36). Like the prophet Simeon who is paired with her (2:25–27), Anna is led by the Holy Spirit to speak about Jesus “to all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem” (2:38). The masculine gender of the signifiers describing her intended audience suggests Anna prophesies to both men and women. Elsewhere, Luke uses the feminine signifier to define an audience of women only (15:9).

I am well aware of Saint Anna; she is the patron saint of my beloved mother. She was also a genuine prophet, and her prophecy predated the Pauline injunction against women teaching or exercising authority over men and the requirement that women keep silent in the church.

Indeed, everything in the Gospels and the initial chapters of Acts predates 1 Corinthians, written in approximately the year 55 AD, and 1 Timothy, which likely dates, along with the other Pastoral Epistles, to St. Paul’s imprisonment in Rome about a decade later, shortly after the events in Acts 28. Therefore, the examples you cite are irrelevant, as St Paul had not even had the Christophany on the Road to Damascus which lead to his conversion from an evil persecutor to a holy apostle.

And from a Reformed, regulatory perspective, it is reasonable to assume that the Pauline injunctions were only universally adopted in their entirety when 1 Timothy’s place in the canon was cemented by Saint Athanasius in the 360s. However, prior to that time, we can expect those churches founded by St Paul and his disciples, which specifically include most of those in Greece and Asia Minor, and also Rome, which he cofounded with Saint Peter, and also in particular the churches founded by St Timothy and bishops whose ordination he participated in* did implement the Pauline injunctions in full.

And we see no real exceptions to this. Even Saint Nino, who evangelized Georgia, did so without violating this rule, since she was an Armenian princess who persuaded the King of Georgia to look into Christianity, without teaching men, exercising authority over men or talking in the church (the Armenians do allow female choristers, who tend to have particularly beautiful voices).

In Revelation, specifically in the letter to Thyatira (Rev. 2:18–29), Jesus criticizes a woman who calls herself a woman prophet—the same word Luke uses for Anna—for “teaching and deceiving my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols” (v. 20). The woman is clearly a leader in the church of Thyatira. But is she a genuine prophet? The prophet Jeremiah makes personal holiness and purity a litmus test for genuine prophecy (Jer. 23:9–40). Jesus, similarly, advises his disciples to expose false prophets by drawing attention to their behavior (Matt. 7:15–23). Unfortunately, the character and behavior of the woman from Thyatira did not meet the litmus test of a genuine prophet. Yet what is often missed is that Jesus does not attack the woman for being a leader, but for being an immoral one. (from CBE International).

This is simply false - what our Lord actually says begins with a rebuke for her teaching. The Pauline injunctions require women to refrain from teaching or holding positions of authority over men, and to be silent in church. A more clear translation may be helpful, as the NKJV is neither as beautiful as the original, nor particularly stylistically competent; the worst of both worlds. Thus I shall quote from the NIV the words of our Lord:

Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols.

Also, please refrain from copy-pasting your arguments wholesale from apologetics websites. Every reply I write, I write by hand; I only copy and paste quotations individually selected from the Bible and other texts I deem appropriate. I would appreciate the same consideration.

So to claim that women prophets do not have authority in the Church is not biblical. Women prophets are not women in general.

Actually, neither male nor female prophets have personal authority; the authority of a prophet comes from the Holy Spirit speaking through them. And St. Paul makes no exception in 1 Timothy for prophetesses. So to say that prophetesses have any authority other than that of the words spoken by the Holy Spirit is unbiblical and contradicts the instructions of St. Paul.

Why would a prophets coming need to be foretold in the bible? That claim is not biblical. Your claims here in regards of women having authority in the Church does not apply to prophets who are messengers from God (men or women). Of course women who are not prophets do not have authority in the mainstream SDA Church.

A woman with the sweeping doctrinal authority of Ellen White is unprecedented; even from beyond the grave, she holds more influence over the Adventist church than anyone alive. And her eschatological prophecy concerning the Investigative Judgement is entirely novel and, contrary to SDA apologetics, is not foretold in scripture.

What is more, if all the doctrinal writings of EGW, such as The Great Controversy, are to be considered prophecy, then she is not an authentic prophetess, because the litmus test for prophets is complete accuracy, and as I have discussed elsewhere, the historical narrative in The Great Controversy does not correspond with the actual history of the church. And there are other problems with her writings as well, which are too numerous to mention.

I notice you qualify your post here about Roman Catholic doctrines of infallibility "ALL the Popes writings". This is not a comparison of fallible men with those who have been given a message from God to give to the people (prophets). You speak of what you do not know.

I can only liken Ellen G. White to other church leaders, such as the Popes (who I chose for a comparison because they are the only other major church leaders who have made a claim as to infallibility), because based on a detailed analysis of her work, I cannot accept Ellen G. White as meeting the criteria of an authentic prophet. If her history of the church was more accurate, and if specific events she predicted as happening in the very near future had happened, and if her doctrines did not contradict scripture, and if she did not exercise a leadership and teaching role in the church contrary to the directions of St. Paul, this would be a very different conversation.

Do you believe God has given spiritual gifts to the church?

Yes, but certainly not to someone like Ellen G White. Most of recent prophets and miracle workers I am aware of are Russian, Greek and Coptic monks and hermits who you would not have heard of.

What we teach is only in support of Sola Scriptura. Where have I or any SDA here at CF ever made a thread based on what EGW says and not scripture?

Every time you post a thread criticizing other Christians, many of whom do make a point of worshipping on the Sabbath or otherwise in their own way honor it and keep it holy, for worshipping on Sunday, when there is no scriptural prohibition against Sunday worship and a litany of good reasons for it, and also the whole issue of the Noachide Laws, you are promoting the doctrines of Ellen G. White and not scripture. And likewise every time you criticize meat consumption, or talk about how in the near future laws will mandate Sunday worship, you are promoting doctrines of Ellen G. White that are unsupported by scripture.

People who ask these questions are normally those who do not want to discuss the scriptures in my experience.

Hope this is helpful.

I for one do want to discuss the scriptures, in particular, 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians, because I see no way Ellen G. White could, on the basis of sola scriptura, hold the leadership role and teaching role that she had, even if she was an inspired prophet.

And I also want to talk about the Didascalia, a first century book of church order similar to the Didache, which the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Church regards as canonical and includes at the end of the New Testament, which among other things mandates the Sunday celebration of the Divine Liturgy. Even if one does not accept it as scripture, it still proves that Sunday worship was a thing in the very early years of the Church.

I want to talk about the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus and other texts which challenge or outright contradict the EGW doctrine of “Soul Seep.”

Finally, I want to talk about John 1, because some people seem confused about the identity of the Word of God - which is Jesus Christ, not the Bible, and some people, from their posts, don’t seem to understand the words of our Savior, Jesus Christ, the incarnate Word of God, are as important as the ten commandments.

* The canons of the early church require three bishops to ordain a new bishop, and in the Eastern churches this rule is followed except in emergencies.

 

[tall73]

Indeed, everything in the Gospels and the initial chapters of Acts predates 1 Corinthians, written in approximately the year 55 AD

There is evidence of women prophesying in I Corinthians:

1Co 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

1Co 11:5 πᾶσα δὲ γυνὴ προσευχομένη ἢ προφητεύουσα ἀκατακαλύπτῳ τῇ κεφαλῇ καταισχύνει τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτῆς· ἓν γάρ ἐστι καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τῇ ἐξυρημένῃ.

That is not to say I accept Ellen White as a prophet. But Paul did not rule out prophesying by women.

Now the larger question, as you mentioned, is whether Ellen White's various statements are all inspired.

Ellen White's own statements on the subject:
I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision -- the precious rays of light shining from the throne," is correct. It is true concerning the articles in our papers and in the many volumes of my books.
RH, September 6, 1906 par. 1

Weak and trembling, I arose at three o'clock in the morning to write to you. God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, it was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision--the precious rays of light shining from the throne. {5T 67.2}

So Ellen White claims that all of the books, articles, and testimonies are inspired. That is a lot of material. And they have released new manuscripts of testimonies at times from the estate vault.

From the Ellen White Estate web site:

Ellen White was a prolific writer, with a total literary output of 100,000 pages

 

[ChetSinger]

Out of curiosity, are there any writings (parts of books or whole books) of Ellen G. White you disagree with? And if so, which ones? What criticisms of Ellen G. White do you regard as most applicable?

I stumbled upon this sub-forum recently and immediately noticed the number of SDA-related threads on it. Perusing them has been interesting because I'd never known much about the SDA church except that they worshipped on Saturday and that Loma Linda was was one of the dietary "blue zones".

I've read this entire thread, to here. And I don't recall a single SDA member responding to your questions and disagreeing with any of Ellen White's writings.

I find that revealing. And also disturbing that a church finds any leader's words to be functionally infallible. Thanks for this thread.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I've read this entire thread, to here. And I don't recall a single SDA member responding to your questions and disagreeing with any of Ellen White's writings.

What part of the book of Isaiah do you disagree with and What criticism do you have about Isaiah?

I find that revealing. And also disturbing that a church finds any leader's words to be functionally infallible. Thanks for this thread.

Are God's Word to his people fallible?

 

[ChetSinger]

What part of the book of Isaiah do you disagree with and What criticism do you have about Isaiah?

Are God's Word to his people fallible?

I've said nothing about Isaiah. Is your second question regarding Ellen White? If so you've reinforced my observations.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I stumbled upon this sub-forum recently and immediately noticed the number of SDA-related threads on it. Perusing them has been interesting because I'd never known much about the SDA church except that they worshipped on Saturday and that Loma Linda was was one of the dietary "blue zones".

I've read this entire thread, to here. And I don't recall a single SDA member responding to your questions and disagreeing with any of Ellen White's writings.

I find that revealing. And also disturbing that a church finds any leader's words to be functionally infallible. Thanks for this thread.

If you want to get the real information about what the SDA church believes in you can easily find it here on our website What do Seventh Day Adventists Really Believe? | Adventist.org

Going to a debate site is probably not going to give you a fair view. There are only a handful of SDA’s who post on this site and most subjects have been discussed at length. Also, some posters who ask questions to SDA’s are not interested in our responses and have other motives. I would be more concerned with the doctrine and if it lines up with Biblical scripture, because at the end of the day, we will all stand before judgement of our Creator and Redeemer. Only God’s pure Word matters, not the opinions of man.

God bless

 

[ChetSinger]

If you want to get the real information about what the SDA church believes in you can easily find it here on our website What do Seventh Day Adventists Really Believe? | Adventist.org

Going to a debate site is probably not going to give you a fair view. There are only a handful of SDA’s who post on this site and most subjects have been discussed at length. Also, some posters who ask questions to SDA’s are not interested in our responses and have other motives. I would be more concerned with the doctrine and if it lines up with Biblical scripture, because at the end of the day, we will all stand before judgement of our Creator and Redeemer. Only God’s pure Word matters, not the opinions of man.

God bless

Thanks, but that wasn't the point of my post. My purpose in observing this thread is to observe the answers given to the OP and determine the degree of infallibility that SDA members ascribe to Ellen White's writings. From what I've read here I think she is considered infallible. If she isn't, what has she been wrong about?